the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Improved Offset Temperature Calculation

Posted by Jeff Id on March 9, 2010

Roman has been working into the wee hours of the night in order to provide climatology with an improved method for anomaly calculation.  As before it uses seasonal information to calculate an optimum offset. It’s exciting to me because it represents one more of the true improvements coming from skeptical blogland.  His post is here.

Of course he’s going to have to publish it somewhere now.

I’ll be out of contact often over the next few days, tradeshows again, but there will be some posts done in the late hours at hotels I’m sure.


7 Responses to “Improved Offset Temperature Calculation”

  1. Ruhroh said

    Jeff,

    Ever since I found the FOIA file link here, The Air Vent has been my first-checked-blog.

    You always have links to the freshest relevant stuff here.

    Once again, job well done, Sir.

    As with some of your other posts, Method First, and the data will tell its own story.
    RR

  2. ts said

    Jeff, few weeks ago you wrote about Watts & D’Aleo paper:

    Many of us are familiar with the accusations made by D’Aleo and EM Smith regarding the systematic elimination of colder temperature stations. They claimed that there is specific intent to distort the temperature record to inflate the true temperatures today. Not that hard to believe considering what we’ve recently learned from Climategate and the IPCC, however this paper goes a step further. It’s a comprehensive report on the numerous flaws in the dataset, including surfacestations, data elimination and a variety of other issues.

    The report is 111 pages long and to put it simply, it contains the single strongest worded accusations against climate science of anything I’ve read from qualified skeptics.

    The report is handled on a single page with a summary for policymakers. I would encourage any (both) policymakers who stop by to consider that these claims are being made by qualified people with background and ability to understand the data and implications.

    Do you still agree that the “strongest worded accusations” were justified, and that the “qualified people”, i. e. D’Aleo, Watts and Smith, really understood “the data and implications”?

  3. Jeff i'd said

    I don’t think the report was witten with the proper tone. My reading of it with my trust of em’s work left an impression of something which is different from what is being claimed now. Perhaps the error was mine tho I need to look again at the report to be sure.

  4. It’s exciting to me because it represents one more of the true improvements coming from skeptical blogland

    Indeed.

  5. Dr. W. said

    Have another beer!

  6. David Jay said

    Jeff:

    If you have reason to visit the middle kingdom again, make sure you have a VPN or remote desktop set up. WordPress is back on the naughty list.

    I am only able to get to wordpress sites (tAV, WUWT, CA) though my remote desktop.

    Regards

  7. […] Pulling apart the denialist machine in detail, Improving the offset temperature calculation, […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: